Between Hillary and '08
Oh, Ned's 15%
By Mark Kilmer Posted in 2008 — Comments (9) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Here's CNN's Jeff Greenfield, telling us that incumbents are in electoral trouble:
Indeed, my own quirky notions have made me curious to see what happens in the New York Senate primary, where Sen. Hillary Clinton's relatively hawkish views on national security don't sit well with a lot of liberals. Her primary opponent, Jonathan Tasini, has no money and no support -- he's now at 15 percent in the polls. If he winds up with a whole lot more primary votes, it will be sign for less secure incumbents that there's a new ball game out there.
If Hillary loses 15% of the vote in her primary to Generic Ned-like Candidate (with the money), it's time for her to remove her various exploratory devices. She probably won't get the party's Presidential nomination, and she's a certain loser in the fall of '08. With her nice stack o' negatives going in, she'll need that fringe.
Read More...
"Tens of thousands of human beings died because Hillary Clinton cast a vote for the war," Tasini said. "Based on that vote alone, Hillary Clinton shouldn't be re-elected."
Yup. She did it, alright.
It's hard to argue against Hillary's $22-million, but we've seen Dems when they get ticked off about something.
"YEAAARRRRGH!"
(Political quagmire-like, but fun to watch.)
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | John McCain: Embarassment — Comments (9) »
Between Hillary and '08 9 Comments (0 topical, 9 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
That she had no chance of being president. And only a small chance of the nomination.
"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle
despite her supoport for the war. I have this on good Authority.
Envisioning when all that is Left is the Right.
sinking what even Michael Moore admits is the "first, best hope for a woman President". Sure, all the Democrat voters can be anti-this-war, but how many of them will really use that as their only reason for voting? How many women are going to decide that the time just isn't right for the first woman President? Besides Cindy Sheehan and Susan Sarandon, I mean.
Also, the Nutroots don't control the money like Hillary does (unless George Soros steps in with $50 million or something, I suppose). She has done some serious money-gathering and distributing in the last six years, in order to secure her power base within her own party. By the time it comes around for the heavyweights to throw their support behind someone to take the nomination, way too many people are going to owe her. Sure, voters ultimately decide who wins elections, but the party really decides who ends up as a contender. The only anti-this-war Democrat I can think of with enough name recognition and government experience that could break this pattern is Gov. John Corzine of New Jersey. He's almost the only one who has enough money to do it himself, and with a reasonable (to Democrats) track record both in the Senate and in an executive position. And I don't see him waltzing in just to torpedo our first, best hope for a woman President.
Even if she loses 25% of the vote in the primary, it will just be looked at as a wakeup call for her. Aside from that, in a year's time, it will be easier for Hillary to triangulate another position on troop withdrawal and make enough critical statements about Bush's handling of Iraq, the Middle East, etc. Plus, she will be able to do John Kerry one better on the "I voted for it before I voted against it" front. Actually, Kerry could have done this, but he and his crew were too pathetic to pull it off. Hillary, on the other hand will just say, "Sure, I voted for the war in Iraq, because Bush lied to me too! I was just a little old junior Senator, and was given doctored evidence about Sadaam's WMD." Problem solved.
Hillary will be able to skate past her initial hawkish stance, and everyone can go back to chanting, "Isn't it about time we had a woman President?"
very much respect who talk about the inevitability of Hillary at least for the Democratic nomination. (It's hard to argue with money and, to an extent, organization.)
I take a different tack. All the bullion in the world can't sell a flawed product to an angry mob. When it comes to casting their votes, even if they're docile day-to-day, I've noticed that quite a few Democrats are an angry mob. (The same can be said of Republicans in certain instances, but they're not on the table for now.)
Hillary is defined. She's not a lot of wiggle room for reinvention. Here opponents can say, "Hillary is X, Y, and Z!" Hillary can say, "No, I'm not! I'm A, B, and C!" If Democrats remember her as X, Y, and Z, that's the perception with which she has to live.
Maybe in 2012, Hillary, if you become more level-headed.
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/08/25/D8JNM09G0.html
I think that I can see Hillary's new strategy. She is going to do her best to continue to appear centrist, but she is going to try to curry favor with as many left wing lunatics who are stridently anti-war as she can in order to help buoy her with the fring base in the primary and general election in the 2008 presidential contest.
That way, she can point to people like Ned Lamont and say to the KosKidz and MoveOn.org crowd, "people like Ned Lamont, who you support, share your views on the war, and he's supporting me." And I think it will work.
It's smart. Not exactly "brilliant," but very smart.
Hillary will still be the nominee for the Democratic Party in 2008 - and she's still going to get slaughtered by any one of the GOP's top candidates if he/she runs a competant campaign.
I also think that Hillary is nervous about her position as way out ahead of everyone in the Democratic field - which is why I think it is HER camp who is putting out stories about her not being sure if she'll run or not, Hillary being the reluctant candidate, blah, blah, blah. She's trying to take the edge off her momentum so she runs a lesser risk of peaking too soon. Then, when she DOES declare, there she's positioning for a "rising phoenix" storyline in the press.
She's soaking up all the money that liberals all over the country have. No one will be able to mount the financial and organizational operation to touch her. All the rest are running for Vice President.
Edwards might be damaged goods for the VP slot. I think she'll choose Mark Warner because if she chose Evan Bayh, she'd probably lose that Senate seat and have less power to govern with in the unlikely event that she won. Mark Warner would also be most likely to succeed her - again, in the unlikely event that she actually succeeds in the first place.
For a minute all the contenders for the D 08 Nomination are going to lie their suit coats on a puddle for Hillary to walk on to the nomination.
Many of the possibles (and Algore is a possible) despise the Clintons. The Clintons destroyed Al Gore Sr's dream that his boy get the White House. He's Damaged Goods.
I just don't see Biden saying: Ive been trying to run for President for 20 years, oh---let me bow, Hillary's walking by.
It's gonna get dirty.
John Edwards? I lived in NC for the entire 6 years of HIS run for the white house, which is all that hillary has done for NY, especially Western NY, where I was raised. Zip. Zed. Zero. Nada de particular if you will.
John Edwards was Appointed to a post at UNC Chapel Hill, aka the Mormon Tabernacle of Liberalism in North Carolina. He couldn't get eleced dog catcher in the smallest burg in the state.
Regardless of your party, when you see a commercial with schools with trailers all over the lawn due to increases in student population, and John Edwards buying computers for schoolkids with his own money, IN IOWA a full 2 years before the 04 election, you get the impression John Edwards didn't give a flyin' leap at a rollin doughnut about NC. And you'd be RIGHT.
He's multilated goods.
I don't see a cakewalk, and I'd vote for Hagel for President before I would Hillary.
and love him five years after leaving office they can buy anybody. Hillary left her brains at her college commencement, but even she's not so dumb not to have learned by watching Bill in PR action, though otherwise he probably had trouble brushing his own teeth, hello Dick Morris.
Hillary's still the favorite, a chance at a smackdown of the HateClinton people [ read normal ]. One thing liberals have a memory for is their abiding hatred, the motive force of their existence. That and her slipping and sliding as the election approaches will help her get the nomination. Then the media takes over!
"a man's admiration for absolute government is proportinate to the contempt he feels for those around him". Tocqueville
It would be great if the Michael Moor and nutroot Demobats decide that for the sake of ideological purity, Hillary will feel their wrath. Get her and her warchest out of the Senate, so she can concentrate on running for President full time.
They'll split their energy between two safe Senate seats, trying to take out two of their most powerful allies. The sheer brilliance is breathtaking.
Then, when she loses, she can take that job on The View.
--
More brilliance such as that can be found at the Academy. And yes, I know how pretentious I sound.